Site Mobile Navigation

Democrats Unleash Ads Focusing on Rivals’ Pasts

WASHINGTON — Democratic candidates across the country are opening a fierce offensive of negative advertisements against Republicans, using lawsuits, tax filings, reports from the Better Business Bureau and even divorce proceedings to try to discredit their opponents and save their Congressional majority.

Opposition research and attack advertising are used in almost every election, but these biting ads are coming far earlier than ever before, according to party strategists. The campaign has intensified in the last two weeks as early voting begins in several states and as vulnerable incumbents try to fight off an onslaught of influences by outside groups.

As they struggle to break through with economic messages, many Democrats are deploying the fruits of a yearlong investigation into the business and personal histories of Republican candidates in an effort to plant doubts about them and avoid having races become a national referendum on the performance of President Obama and his party.

In Ohio, Representative Betty Sutton calls her Republican rival, Tom Ganley, a “dishonest used-car salesman” who has been sued more than 400 times for fraud, discrimination, lying to customers about repairs, overcharging them and endangering their safety. She warns voters, “You’ve heard the old saying, buyer beware!”

In Arizona, Representative Harry E. Mitchell accused his opponent David Schweikert of being “a predatory real estate speculator who snatched up nearly 300 foreclosed homes, been cited for neglect and evicted a homeowner on the verge of saving his house, just to make a buck.”

In New York, Representative Michael Arcuri introduces his Republican challenger, Richard Hanna, as a millionaire who “got rich while his construction company overcharged taxpayers thousands, was sued three times for injuries caused by faulty construction and was cited 12 times for health and safety violations.”

Negative ads can be successful, whether or not they are fair and fully accurate, particularly if they lure an opponent into responding or if they define a political newcomer before he can define himself. But they also carry risks, especially in a year when voters are frustrated about the economy and impatient with politics as usual.

Photo

Commercials for Representative Betty Sutton of Ohio criticize her Republican challenger, Tom Ganley, and his background as a car salesman.

“Our strongest piece of opposition research on Democrats is their voting records,” said Representative Pete Sessions of Texas, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. “While character assassination seems to be the strategy for Democrats this year, the American people are supporting Republican candidates because they are providing an alternative.”

A debate has broken out among some Democratic officials about the effectiveness — or wisdom — of running such pointedly negative advertisements with five weeks remaining in the campaign. But party strategists said candidates did not have the luxury of waiting until the final stretch to go negative, particularly if the goal is to localize the races.

“When you’re talking about whether an individual really belongs in Congress, you’re not talking about the national issues,” said Steve McMahon, a Democratic consultant who creates television advertising for several candidates in the party.

He added: “Anytime you get personal in campaign advertising, there’s always a risk that it goes too far to be credible or it backfires altogether. That risk is typically mitigated by research that’s done in advance to determine the correct tone and what will make the ad credible.”

So far, many Republican candidates are forcefully defending themselves but not taking the bait by starting their own personal offensives. A review of television advertisements presented since Labor Day showed that the Republicans were basing theirs almost entirely on the records of Democrats on health care, the economic stimulus package and the first vote the Democrats cast when Congress convened in 2009: for making Nancy Pelosi speaker of the House.

Even many of the critical Republican advertisements produced by the candidates or the party are done with a softer touch. (Outside groups, which are investing record amounts of money for a midterm election, do not always follow suit.)

In Texas, Republicans are trying to defeat Representative Chet Edwards, a moderate Democrat who remains likable to many residents in his district, which includes the Crawford ranch of former President George W. Bush. An advertisement suggests that Mr. Edwards has changed in Washington, with a narrator calmly saying, “After 20 years, he’s not independent.”

In North Dakota, Rick Berg, a Republican trying to unseat Representative Earl Pomeroy, a Democrat, decided to make his latest ad about negative ads. “Isn’t it time North Dakota has a congressman who will change Washington and not change the subject with a negative ad?” Mr. Berg asked.

Photo

Also in Ohio, Representative John Boccieri has highlighted back taxes that his rival Jim Renacci owed.

The Democratic ads are like a prosecutor’s case, carrying no rebuttals or countervailing facts. Yet for all of the protestations that arise every election year about negative advertising, there is plenty of evidence that the attacks are effective, particularly against candidates without a deep connection to voters. This year, as Republicans work to gain at least the 39 seats they need to take control of the House, many of their nominees have never run for office and come from business backgrounds, which often include a trail of documents.

For more than a year, a large team of researchers at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has been digging into the backgrounds of potential Republican candidates. It is political detective work, with every piece of a candidate’s past fair game, so long as it is a part of the public record. In some cases, aides have been sent to districts for a closer look as they compile thorough dossiers, which are ultimately approved by a team of lawyers before the information is turned into television commercials.

Some of the material is rooted in policy, including the “Fair Tax,” a national sales tax pledge signed by many Republicans, which Democrats say would raise sales taxes by 23 percent. Many of the findings, however, are not rooted in legislation or policy.

In Tennessee, a Republican candidate accused his Democratic challenger of unearthing a divorce proceeding containing an accusation about intimidating his wife with a gun. In South Dakota, a poor driving record became a part of the dialogue after it was revealed that the Republican nominee for Congress had received 20 speeding tickets and numerous citations for failing to appear in court, running stop signs and not making payments, which twice resulted in arrest warrants.

Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, who leads the Republican recruitment effort in the House, said he warned candidates to conduct their own research before deciding to run so they were not surprised by anything dug up by Democrats.

“It’s called winning ugly,” Mr. McCarthy said. “But a lot of time it backfires, because people in their communities know them.”

Jim Renacci, the Republican nominee in Ohio’s 16th Congressional District, has owned a car dealership, nursing homes, an arena football team and other businesses. Four years ago, he was assessed nearly $1.4 million in unpaid state taxes, interest and fees, which he ultimately paid. The issue has been replayed again and again in television advertisements from his opponent, Representative John Boccieri, and Democratic groups.

“There are lemons, and then there’s used-car millionaire Jim Renacci,” an announcer said in an advertisement last week, as images of an old rickety station wagon appeared on the screen before segueing to an unflattering photograph of Mr. Renacci.

In an interview, Mr. Renacci dismissed criticism about his business background, saying: “He’s going to go over my 30-year experience and try and find this little thing or that little thing. As far as I’m concerned, you always know you’re doing well when your opponent is attacking.”

Amanda Cox contributed research.

A version of this article appears in print on September 26, 2010, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: The Gloves Come Off Early
For the Midterm Elections: Democrats Unleash
Biting Ads Based
on Rivals’ Pasts. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe